Matt Yglesias

28 Responses to “Official Recession”

1. Jasper Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 2:30 pm

   My own take on this news is that it’s good news for Obama. The average post-war US recession has lasted about eleven months. Even if this one’s twice as long as average, GDP should be expanding again by the end of 2009. That doesn’t imply a quick return to prosperity, of course, nor an unemployment rate that immediately begins dropping. But my guess is things should look a lot better by the time we arrive at mid-terms, or at least by the time Obama has to seek reelection.

2. Nicholas Beaudrot Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 3:21 pm

   1956?

3. ed Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 3:31 pm

   The Onion, per usual, reveals all. Things had to be pretty bad to elect a black guy with a weird name, a non-Christian father, from outside of the established political royalty (obviously), and unashamed of his intellectual curiosity. Things are bad.

4. Jasper Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 3:32 pm

   Nicholas Beaudrot:

   The country was enjoying unprecedened prosperity when Ike ran for reelection, although not long after his second term commenced the country entered a pretty severe recession:

   http://harvardbusiness.org/flatmm/hbextras/200805/recessions/

5. JohnH Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 3:44 pm

   It’s worse than its having started by the new year. Most people perceived themselves as never having gained ground from the boom or recovery in the first place, and they’d turned fiercely against the war. No wonder the GOP base was also increasingly torn against itself until McCain went wingnut. Obama was getting set to run on all that message, although he had to shift gears with the meltdown.

6. Guy Yedwab Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 3:48 pm

   I think it’s a bit of a cop-out to say that because of the recession, McCain didn’t really have a chance. Sure, maybe an incumbent party hasn’t won reelection during a recession. Also, a black person has never been elected.

   But imagine if John McCain had put together a strong team of economic advisors from the sharpest wing of the conservative end of the economy; if he’d put together an economic plan to sell to the American people, not something bookish and ineffective like a spending freeze. Imagine if he’d actually been instrumental in putting together a rational bailout plan, if his suspension hadn’t blown up in his face.

   McCain had the chance to create a new economic direction, something to challenge Obama’s economic vision. Instead, he talked about earmarks.

7. CParis Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 4:03 pm

   Who cares about precedent?
   The GOP was completely tone-deaf regarding the views of the majority of the electorate. Whether the recession officially began in December 2007 or July 2008 is beside the point – most voters have long felt their own financial situations have not improved, and in many cases have gotten worse under Bu$h and the GOP’s leadership.
   And the GOP’s focus on “scary” socialist, abortion and gays looked increasingly ludicrous in the face of average Americans’ increased expenses, declining home values, flat incomes, crushed 401ks, maxed-out credit cards and non-existent unemployment benefits.

8. Jack Says:
   December 1st, 2008 at 5:42 pm

   Yes, but the average American has not been doing very well since Reagan and yet 20 out of the last 28 years have seen a Republican in the presidency. And for the last eight years we have had one of the most incompetent, characterless, morally backrupt, hopelessly worthless idiots in that office, and he was first elected while the economy was doing relatively well under the leadership of a Democrat. We need much more to explain the horrible through hopefully temporary bungling on the part of the electorate this past generation.

9. JonF Says:
   December 2nd, 2008 at 6:37 am

   Re: Yes, but the average American has not been doing very well since Reagan and yet 20 out of the last 28 years have seen a Republican in the presidency.

   Except that in the late 90s most people generally did do quite well– and it was a Democrat in office too.

10. Ed Says:
    December 2nd, 2008 at 9:44 am

    There is an established historical pattern with parties trying to hold onto the White House after two turns in patter. In 1948, the Democrats had held the White House for four turns and their vote percentage declined by about 4%, and then declined another 3% in the next election.

    In 1960, the Republicans had held the White House for two turns and their vote declined by about 9%.

    In 1968, the Democratic vote at the end of two turns declined by 19%!

    In 1976, after two Republican turns the Republican vote dropped by 10%. In 1988 it dropped by 5%.

    In 2000, after two turns, the Democratic vote dropped by only about 1%, which in the context of the preceding was quite an achievement. But the cut the Democratic popular vote margin was somewhat higher.

    Now this pattern does not hold before World War II and its not set in stone or anything. But McCain basically had to repeat Gore’s achievement in 2000 and limit the slippage in the Republican presidential vote to about 1% or so. Since the conventional wisdom is that Gore ran a horrible campaign, this could have been doable. But I think the historical pattern is there for a reason, opposition tends to coalesce against governments that have been there too long.

11. Persia Says:
    December 2nd, 2008 at 11:05 am

    I think this is a good time to revisit the whopper, told by some McCain staffers in the late days of the campaign, that Obama was the ‘incumbent’ now because people were so familiar with him.

    I just need the laugh.

12. cialis Says:
    March 1st, 2009 at 6:43 pm

    cialis
    I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!

13. zyban Says:
    March 12th, 2009 at 11:34 pm

    I want to say – thank you for this!

14. tramadol Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 6:18 am

    tramadol
    If you have to do it, you might as well do it right

15. brand viagra Says:
    April 2nd, 2009 at 5:24 am

    It is the coolest site,keep so!
    buy cheap viagra

16. viagra brand Says:
    April 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 am

    It is the coolest site,keep so!
    cheap brand pfizer viagra